Tinka

I didn't really expect the world here. I watched it mostly because I like both lead actresses and enjoyed their previous work.

The premise is as basic as it gets, which is fine, though I will never understand American's obsession with prom.

The writing is very generic and predictable and not always in the fun way. There are some genuinely funny moments (that one Mom calling the dog her son's sister was hysterical) that make the movie wat watchable, but other than this is has unfortunately not much going for it.

I'm fine with characters that are not instantly likable because that leaves room for development, but especially in a film like this, you need to be able to root for the characters which is nearly impossible.

The tone is also a bit all over the place. It feels like a very try-hard raunchy teen comedy (trying very to jump into the Bottoms momentum of female comedy) that doesn't really know how far it wants to do. Saying "fuck" in every second sentence doesn't make it more "adult" to say the least. It feels exactly what I would expect from Disney trying out R-Rated comedy tbh.

It's an okay movie for a lazy Sunday afternoon, nothing more.

Just let the Japanese do their thing, please. When it comes to Godzilla movies, they clearly know how it has to be done. I'm not even saying that every entry in the current "Monsterverse" is bad (I enjoy some of those films) but this one is just a whole different level.

A post WWII drama that deals with a Japan trying to get back on its feed, with the aftermath of nuclear disaster and survivors guilt that just happens to have Godzilla in it.

Godzilla is more a metaphor in itself and treated as an actual threat. He also looks incredible. It's kind of a back to the basics Godzilla film that uses themes also present in the old ones, but with a new technology and a more serious treatment.

I remember that, when Godzilla (2014) came out one of the biggest issues was that there wasn't enough Godzilla in it and while he certainly is not as present here as the human characters, it actually works.

First off, Godzilla is in the movie the right amount. He exists in this world, thankfully without a lot of empty science mumbo jumbo, and every scene with him is spectacular.

Second, and that's the more important part here, the film makes you actually care about the human characters. While the Monsterverse tries very hard (and fails every single time) to make the humans more than just an annoying distraction from the monster action (and to deliver an endless amount of exposition) the humans here are what drives the story.

The actors are amazing and the characters are likable, well-written and form believable relationships. I was interested in them. I wanted them to be fine.

I'm seriously in awe about what a fantastic movie that was. Godzilla of a different kind.

Well, I had a lot of fun with this movie!

Being panned by critics I wasn't sure what to expect, but I thoroughly enjoyed it. The pacing was a little bit off at times and it had too many subplots going on, but I appreciate that the movie actually tried to give everyone in its large cast a moment to shine.

The story was fine, and even if it recycled some plot points from earlier films, I didn't mind that. The same was said about Ghostbusters 2 back in the day and I still love this one. The single plot points did connect in the end and wrapped up nicely.

Garraka had a cool design, though I doubt he will reach the cult status of Gozar and Vigo, it worked. I also like the new character editions of Nadeem and Lars, both who were excellent and a lot of fun to watch.

The old cast got a little bit more to do sometimes. Ray especially was integral to the story, Vankman (a little bit more than a cameo) was fun as always, it made sense to include Janine as the fourth legacy Ghostbuster since she has been with the team from the very beginning and I think it's established now that Winston has always been just THAT guy.

It is a bit unfortunate that Sigourney Weaver wasn't part of the film and I still believe they missed the opportunity of including her son Oscar in this revival of the franchise.

Most of all however I enjoyed the character interactions. It's nice to have a family dynamic at the center and Gary's struggle as a step-parent felt real and genuine, which made especially Phoebe's acceptance in the end even more endearing.

The hint of a queer love story for Phoebe was also quite interesting and should the franchise continue, I hope that gets explored more. Also in question, are Trevor and Lucky still a thing or not? Callie and Gary, super wholesome.

I enjoy the cast so much I really hope the studio doesn't listen to the critics and we get at least one more film with them.

I found this adaptation of the Anne Frank story while looking for a movie to show in class. It is a very effective film, but that has a lot to do with its powerful source material.

Anne Frank's diary or "The Diary of a Young Girl" is a piece of literature I would recommend everybody to read, because it is such a quintessential raw telling of a witness that lived, and sadly died during World War 2.

The movie is well-acted, and especially lead address Lea van Acken gives a powerhouse performance.

Stylistically the film is interesting. Often it feels like a play, especially when Anne addresses viewers directly and I could see this working as a stage adaptation. The director uses many close ups which adds to the feeling of claustrophobia in the hideout. The music is very mellow and blends into the background, but adds to powerful moments.

The film also doesn't shy away from exploring female sexuality and presents itself as much as a coming of age story, as it is a piece of war media.

If anything I feel the movie leans sometimes too much into modernism, especially in ways the characters talk or interact with each other. Even the way the movie is filmed feels a bit out of touch with the time period it presents, I can't even explain why, but everything does feel very 2010s here.

I think however the movie might speak better to a younger audience that way. Though it is very quiet and dialogue heavy.

I think overall it is a fine adaptation and definitely worth checking out.

This is a tough one. It's not great, it's not bad, it's just somewhere in-between.

Ryan Coogler had a tough task to accomplish here and I think they did what they could given the circumstances. There were so many decisions to make regarding the tragic passing of Chadwick Boseman and working around a pandemic.

As far as paying tribute to Chadwick and T'Challa goes, I think the film did a beautiful job, especially in the opening scene and the mid-credit one that let his legacy live on. I also fully understand the decision not to recast the character. I think it was the most tasteful way to handle the situation. In-universe, passing the torch to T'Challa's son one day also seems like a fitting idea.

Taking a look at the rest of the movie however, it's a mess and way too long for its own good.

Personal feelings about Letitia Wright and her views regarding the pandemic aside, I don't think Shuri should've become the next Black Panther and she doesn't work as a main character at all. While her conflict was played well, it was also very one note in the writing. Not once did the story or character (even before that) indicate any interest to become the Black Panther. If anything her storyline was more or less if she can recreate the flower to even make a new Panther possible, not to take up that mantle. Shuri is not a warrior, but a scientist. Sure, she can hold her own in a battle, but if all her appearances within the MCU indicated something, then that she works best as a scientist leaving the fighting to others. She's a badass in her own field, leave it at that. Her arc would've worked just as well by coming to terms that Wakanda needs a new Panther and that she doesn't betray her brother's legacy by helping to create one. As far as candidates go, I think it should've been Nakia or Okoye, because it would've fitted their storylines so much better. M'Baku maybe as well, though I'm fine with him becoming King instead.

The movie also unfortunately decided to sideline all the wrong characters. I don't think Shuri works as the sole protagonist, even if that is an unpopular opinion here. Some characters just function better in a supporting role. Again, I think focusing on Nakia or Okoye would've benefitted the movie more. M'Baku, while having some of my favorite moments in the film, also finally deserved his time to shine.

I appreciated the short return of Michael B. Jordan, because he is fantastic, though even that cameo felt shoehorned in.

Angela Bassett gave a very strong performance and was clearly a standout in the movie. I think Queen Ramonda's death however was absolutely pointless and unnecessary and she was just used as a prop for Shuri, something that could've been done differently in so many ways. Especially since she sacrificed herself for a character neither she or the audience have had any connection at this point.

Speaking of, I like Right Williams. I like Dominique Thorne's portrayal. I don't think she should've been introduced in this movie. There was no point in her being the scientist to figure out a way to find vibranium. If anything it felt a tad ridiculous, especially since even if Namor managed to kill her, the government already used her technology and knew about it, so that whole plot was flimsy at best. It also feels weird to introduce Iron Heart without even mentioning Tony Stark, but that's probably the MCU continuing to shit on its OG character (within the movie-verse I mean).

Namor started out as an interesting villain, with at least some sympathetic motivation until he went full out "let's conquer the surface world" without a warning. He also was basically there for lots of exposition. The movie was full of that. So. Much. Exposition.

I always enjoy Martin Freeman as Everett Ross, but a cameo in the beginning would've done that. The whole side plot with his ex-wife could've been cut and nothing would've been missing from the film.

The cinematography was beautiful and the CGI was better than in the first film, but got gradually worse as the movie progressed. The fight choreography was okay-ish but not very innovative.

In the end, I think they tried very hard to work around the incredible loss they suffered and I respect that. I wish they would've taken more time to work on the script though. There's a good movie hiding somewhere inside of this jumbled mess, but unfortunately it spends most of its time running around and chasing a red line. It is still better than a lot of other films the MCU has put out there in recent years, easily superior to the likes of Multiverse of Madness or Thor: Love & Thunder but still far from the greatness it could've been.

I'm not entirely sure what to think about this one. In a way I think it's not a necessary spin off and that Netflix put a lot of money into it instead of continuing some very promising new shows. Then again, it's a nice watch, it looks pretty, it has great actors in it and obviously carries Bridgerton's very own brand of Regency Era melodrama.

Bridgerton is insane, let's face it. But oh so entertaining.

I love the actors chosen to portray the younger versions of known characters and the chemistry between Charlotte and George is insane.

Leave it to Bridgerton to play this part of history as a sexy romantic tragedy (including a villain in form of an abusive doctor).

I think the romance worked well. I wish they would have focused more on the "experiment" as they called it though. I wished we would have seen Charlotte play a bigger part in pushing England towards equality, it felt like they thought about the romance on the show, but not this part.

I liked Lady Danbury's arc overall but could've done without her romance with Violet's father.

Generally speaking, I felt the scenes in present day just didn't work as well. The show tends to focus a bit too much on what felt like unnecessary subplots.

I do however adore Brimsley and Reynolds. They are everything.

But seriously, I can't get over the Hamilton in the room. Like, did I expect George to break out into song and be all like "You'll Be Back...?" Maybe.

In a way Scream 6 seems like an apology for the awful Scream 5. Or they just listened to the criticism and tried to work with some of it. In a way it also feels like this is the film writers and directors actually wanted to make all along, but they needed Five to set it up. Either way, it's much much better, even if it's borderline illogical, but we'll, there's a lot of stabbing, so I'm mostly fine with it.

Spoiler alert.

I still will never forgive them for the Never Campbell disrespect though. That woman is the Queen of Scream and no matter how much money she asks for, you'll give it to her.

Anyways, back to the movie.

The four survivors of the last film return and are now attending college in New York, mirroring Scream 2. I think they could've done a bit more with the overall location change but it works pretty well for what it's supposed to do, namely giving Ghostface a larger field to play on.

Melissa Barrera's Sam is still the main focus and while she was one of my main criticisms in the last movie, she works better here. Barrera is still not the best actress and falls a bit flat against her co-stars, but Sam is much better written and she does a great job in the final act.

Jenna Ortega shines again as Sam's sister Tara, making me wish again they would switch this rebooted franchise around and let her be the lead, but at least the chemistry between the sisters feels more legit this time around. I enjoyed the Meeks kids in the last film and even more so here. Mindy feels more like her own character instead of just the Randy replacement and Chad is just so damn charming (just love Mason Gooding on Love, Victor) and his romance with Tara is actually pretty sweet.

Gale returns once again and her face off with Ghostface is one of the most thrilling scenes of the franchise. Also returning is Kirby and I have never been as happy before about a recon as I am here. Sure, Scream 5 introduced the idea of Kirby having survived, but this movie got her back into the mix again and once again Hayden Panettiere shines. Just to mention it, Scream 4 is underrated and the second best in the franchise. BOOM! Mic drop!

I do enjoy the legacy characters and new core group (or core four, as the movie never lets you forget) and I'm glad they survived to face another Ghostface, but it still feels a bit like a cop out. The newly introduced characters are solely existing to be killed, be the killer(s) or in case of Sam's new toy boy, be the red herring no one believes in.

This movie has probably some of the most brutal killings in Scream history and now some of my favorite moments in the entire franchise. The opening scene was spectacular and unexpected, the supermarket massacre, Gale facing off Ghostface, the tension in the subway and the sisters fighting the killers are all brilliant.

I also admit that while I had some suspicions about the identities of the killers, the movie does a fine job of throwing the audience off the loop. I'm not sure if three killers is as innovative as they think it is, but it made for an exciting climax.

Unfortunately, with all the good comes also a lot of dumb.

First off, they didn't dodge the hilariously stupid Billy Loomis hallucinations. Thankfully they toned them down, but it's still so dumb and unnecessary. The film also sticks with the idea that Sam might have some "serial killer gene" which is stupid. They could salvage it a bit if a third movie should happen, by at least committing to the idea and let her become some kind of vigilante Ghostface going after other killers, only for Tara being forced to stop her ...or something like that. Right now it's just silly.

While I like the overall idea and conclusion, the story also toys with some smarter and more interesting ideas in the beginning. One would be the aforementioned Sam becoming a type of Ghostface herself, the other being the one delivered in the opening scene. For a few moments, after the first Ghostface takes off his mask, I was hoping we'd get a movie that reveals the killers identity to the audience but not the characters. A movie that lets us in on Ghostface's perspective, that changes the game. Imagine the thrill to know as an audience member who is behind it and then watch the characters figuring it out. That would've been a different path for a Scream movie.

Logic is also not the film's strongest part. I know, we're not trying to be too logical here, but seriously, the Woodsboro murders are famous. Sam is famous. Nobody knows that Bailey is Richie's dad? Nobody knows about his siblings? FBI Agent Kirby can't figure that one out? Bailey was a detective before his son became a killer and I'm pretty sure he didn't hide his three kids away.

Speaking of the FBI or police work in general, no one knew how all the evidence from years of Ghostface killings disappeared? They could find DNA from the original killers on the masks but not the new ones? When they mentioned that someone on the police force must be in on it it's used as a throwaway line instead of inspecting the people who are? Yeah sure.

Also, Ethan saving Mindy made not much sense. Why would he even do that?

The film is super dumb, but also super fun. I had an actual blast watching it and despite some obvious flaws, I enjoyed watching it a lot.

So, this one will have spoilers for the TV Show and the book. I will more or less write a comparison here, because I really love the book and fell for the TV Show as well, sometimes despite the differences and sometimes because of them.

So, let's go into the good, the bad and the okay-ish.

The Good aka What really worked:

• The entire cast is phenomenal. Give those casting directors a raise or something because they found gold here. The cast is so good and has so much chemistry they could easily pass for a real band. Riley Keough sounds like I imagined Daisy to sound like in the book, it's incredible. She also gives a powerhouse performance. So does Suki Waterhouse as Karen. Seriously, all the actors are so fantastic, though Sam Claflin, who I have been a fan of since first watching him in The Hunger Games: Catching Fire is something else. His performance as Billy is so nuanced and broken and beautiful, it makes you feel sympathy for him even when Billy is at his worst. And damn that guy can sing. And play guitar. And looks sexy as hell while going so.
• While the entire cast has chemistry, Riley Keough and Sam Claflin burn down the house. They sound perfect together as Daisy and Billy and they are a lightning in a bottle together. I love the complexity of Daisy's and Billy's relationship and they sell it every second. It's such a tragic and beautiful dynamic of two people, in this case soulmates (if we gonna use the term) that are perfect for each other and yet so wrong at the same time. Billy and Daisy is the love story of finding your other half at the worst possible time and it breaks your heart.
• Giving Camila a bigger role. Camila Morrone is fantastic and while I liked Camila in the books and she was an essential character, the show gave her more focus in the overall storyline and allowed her a deeper emotional journey that the entire story benefited from. Camila is such a strong character and the show allows her to go through all the emotions. She is angry and hurt and she is allowed to express it all. Her relationship with Billy (and to an extant Daisy) is also beautiful and heartbreaking and it's easy to understand why Billy makes the choice he makes. His feelings for Daisy never invalidate his feelings for Camila. She is the one that keeps it together and (especially in the beginning) an integral part to The Six. I also love how her job as a photographer intertwines her more with the band.
• Warren is even better.
• The music. I love the music. Am I sad some songs are rewritten or switched out? Yes, but at the same time I love the music they play on the show. If they'd decide to send the cast on an actual tour as a band, I'd buy tickets.
• Simone's extended storyline. I loved Simone in the book and I'm so glad she was more included on the show and got her own arc. Her relationship with Bernie is beautiful.
• How they handled Daisy's overdose and that Billy found her
• Daisy getting some conclusion regarding her parents (even if it wasn't what she hoped for)
• The final interviews and moments between Billy and grown up Julia as well as Daisy and her.
• Billy's and Daisy reunion in the end. I think many people will disagree here with me and I get it, I love the open ending in the book, but I'm a bit of a sucker for happier and more conclusive once and I really enjoyed that more hopeful one of the show.
• The overall tone of the show and capturing the zeitgeist.
• More insight and character arcs for the band members

What didn't really work for me (I can't actually call it "bad" because it wasn't on show terms, but adaptation-wise)

• The pacing in the first two episodes didn't really work for me. It felt a bit all over the place. Too slow on some occasions and speed running through others.
• Pete erasure. I get it. Pete wasn't much of a character but I feel like it was the point. He was someone for Eddie to bounce of on and it showed that the band wasn't just this big found family (we'll get to that)
• Not enough Rod. Look, Rod is golden in the book and I wish he was more on the show.
• Speaking of, erasing Rod's love life and sexuality.
• Billy's relapse. Look, I think the whole aspect of addiction was handled better in the books, but I felt like focusing more on Billy's relapse wasn't the best choice. It felt too much for the sake of relationship drama, especially since they changed the reason behind it. Billy struggles throughout the book, but he only breaks after Teddy's death (which happens way later on the show) and it felt like more in-character to Billy, especially since not all the focus of the personal struggles was about him being torn between Daisy and Camila.
• I also think the relationship between Billy and Teddy wasn't as well handled on the show. Don't get me wrong, I still loved them, but the father-son dynamic was still more intense in the book.
• Karen's abortion. Again, the show did well but the book handled it more carefully and gave more insight into Karen's and Graham's minds. It was so powerful how the book showed Karen actively choosing herself over expectations and she admits to never loving Graham the way he loved her, which the show backtracks on in the end. Graham's feelings also were more complex.
• The frame narrative. Of course you can't use a frame narrative on a TV Show like in a book, but I still wish the show would've included a bit more of the interview parts.

The "in-between" or okay-ish.

Let's talk about changes or plot points I'm a bit torn about.

• Adding to the Billy/Eddie conflict. I admit, in either version, book and TV Show, it's hard to like Eddie. While I get his frustrations and I personally think Billy is more of a jerk to him in the book, his inner thoughts also help to understand him a bit better, the show ups it to 11 and Eddie mostly just comes of as very whiny. The added romance or pining between him and Camila also doesn't do it any favors. While it kinda adds to Camila's storyline it makes Eddie's issues more about being in love with her and jealous of Billy than about his part in the band and wanting more recognition. (Warren calling him out was great though).
• Twin erasure. I honestly don't care that Susana and Maria are not in the book. I guess filming with more little children would've been difficult and in the end it doesn't change much about the story.
• The way Daisy joins The Six. Again, torn about it. I think the show should've kept The Six's rising stardom before Diary joined them as well as Daisy's original first album. I think the way they join forced works for the show, bit the book offers more meatier scenes and better development.
• SNL. The SNL moment in the book, where Daisy finally realizes she's in love with Billy, made me cry. The show changed that and it gave us the Pittsburgh concert in exchange, which I also immensely enjoyed. Not as much though.
• Changed lyrics and different songs. I enjoy the Aurora songs from the book and at first I was bumped they mostly got switched out or rewritten, but I get it. Just because something works while written doesn't mean it works with music. And I really love the new songs. I do miss the original Honeycomb even if I love the new one as well. But the moment in the book with Daisy changing the lyrics back to it's original version was so powerful.
• The way Daisy leaves the band. Again, both versions work fine. I'm not sure what to think about the change. Again, her noticing that Billy will only self-destruct more with her around, wanting to get clean and needing to get away from everything works perfectly fine for the show and is very powerful. I do love her honest conversation with Camila, laying all the cards on the table though. It's a bit similar to Billy's relapse where it felt more about the characters as individuals than their romantic entanglements.

I think that's about it? There's probably more to say, but right now that's the things that come to my mind and it's already super long.

"Daisy Jones and The Six" is a great TV show based on the great novel. As an adaptation it is flawed, but it captures most of the book's essence. For me, I can only say that I enjoy both of them for what they are.

I don't remember the last time I felt so conflicted over a TV Show. Maybe never.

Books spoilers ahead, btw.

If I see this just as a Show, I was thoroughly entertained and invested. If I watch this as an adaptation, well that's really depending on what book you are looking at.

Season 1 was actually pretty great. I had my doubts when they first announced that the Crows would join the cast, but despite changing the timeline of the stories, it really worked well. The characters of Six of Crows were introduced in a prequel kind of way with their storyline intertwining with that of Alina and it gave us some fun crossover opportunities that we wouldn't have seen otherwise. The actual first book, Shadow and Bone, was also done quite well. I admit, apart from great world-building and introducing some fantastic characters, the original Grisha Trilogy are my least favorite books in that universe Leigh Bardugo built. The Crows Duology are some of the best books I've ever read and the King of Scars books are right behind it. So, I didn't mind the changes made to the trilogy. Especially Alina and Mal were done so much better.

Going into Season 2, the trailers made it already clear that this wouldn't just be Siege and Storm added with some Crow shenanigans, but also Ruin and Rising. Totally fine by me, because apart from introducing characters like Nikolai, Tamar and Tolya, most of the second book is focused on romantic tension and lots of angst. Barely anything happens until the end. Combining it with the third book always made sense, because otherwise there wouldn't have been much story to tell.

I think they did most of Siege and Strom well and pulled very much a Catching Fire here, by taking the middle book and improving on it in almost every way. Gone is a lot of the teen angst and story and character growth are more at the center. Mal especially benefits from it because he is allowed to be his own character instead of Alina's whiny boyfriend.

They tweaked some aspects of it, but again that is fine and worked very well. Only issue I have regarding that is the treatment of Sturmhond, Nikolai's alter ego, who is treated as such in the books, but just Nikolai in a different coat on the show. I don't blame actor Patrick Gibson for that though, he is great as Nikolai and Sturmhond is on the writing.

It's Ruin and Rising when the problems start. Or rather it's the entire final episode that goes completely off rails.

While the involvement of the Crows (and we get to them) changes the status quo a bit (honestly, it does feel like Kaz and his Crew could've taken down the Darkling alone at this point) it makes for a very action packed and fun penultimate episode. The rest however feels like that every person who complained about Alina's initial ending and happily ever after in the books just won by whining loud enough.

I'm one of those people who enjoyed her ending in the books. I think choosing a quiet life and being with the person she loved after all the horrors of war made sense for her. Same goes for the consequence of losing her powers. It didn't weaken her, something Rule of Wolves also showed, it just took her into a direction of living freely for the first time in her life. Same goes for Mal.

The show completely changed that. Not only was the Darkling's death rather underwhelming compared to his book counterpart, Alina didn't sacrifice her powers. A newly resurrected Mal falls into an existential crisis (granted, that one makes sense) and leaves her to become the new Sturmhond. I think the writers confused Sturmhond briefly with the Dread Pirate Roberts from The Princess Bride here. Sturmhond is Nikolai, not a title.
Alina stays in Ravka to form the triumvirate with Genya and Zoya (David is missing or dead and I am confused about this decision) and can now use the shadow cut and is apparently turning evil. Or at least loses herself to her powers.

Choices were made, people. They did fine with the Grisha Trilogy until this final episode. This ain't it, folks.

But let's move to Ketterdam for a moment.

I mentioned before that I liked the inclusion of the Crows last time and would they have done another prequel-esque story here, it would have been fine.

They got a lot of things right, don't get me wrong. Them getting to know and befriending Nina worked very well. Wylan's introduction was a lot of fun. Matthias in Hellgate was handled well. I liked the Shu Han heist that re-introduced them to Alina's storyline and I think would that have been it, it would have been fine.

The elephant in the room is Crooked Kingdom, the second book in the duology.

Six of Crows and Crooked Kingdom are masterfully build up upon with so many great twists and turns and emotional payoff. Now, why would you get the really stupid idea to take a lot of the second book, without any build up, and cram it into a season that has a completely different focus? Not only was it disconnected to the rest of the storyline, it also ruins so much for a potential spin off.

My best guess is that, despite the show doing well, the producers are afraid that Netflix won't greenlit the spin off because they love to run with their axe through everything these days and wanted to do as much with these characters as possible. Fine, I can understand that to a point... and as just part of the TV show it kinda works (apart from the disconnection to the rest and it feeling slightly rushed) but as an adaptation of two of the best books in the fantasy genre, it is atrocious.

A lot of emotional moments from these characters are half-assed because the proper build up is missing. How can you tell the second part of a story without the first?
It's like doing The Empire Strikes Back but without the original Star Wars. Sure, Season 1 introduced these characters and made audiences care, and I assume non-book fans will be fine with it, but as a fan of the books, it feels like a proper slap in the face. Some changes when adapting a book to screen are necessary, these however were not.

Kaz's backstory, the relationship between Kaz and Inej, Tante Heleen, the entire story with Pekka Rollins - all half-assed because of...reasons, I guess.

Inej is especially done dirty. Her character arc and trauma feel completely erased in favor of her romantic relationship with Kaz. And look, I love their relationship. It's beautiful and unique, but it is not the focus of her character. By killing off Tante Heleen in a throwaway line, so much is taken from her. Replacing her parents with a random brother, making her part of the Sturmhond crew in the end, takes away so many moments from her that I have no idea how they want to salvage this should the spin off happen. At this point I don't even see how they want to re-introduce her to join the Ice Court Heist, if the show gets renewed (or spin off greenlit).

I'll give them Jesper and Wylan though. Why their relationship is build up better and perfectly in the books, they just won me over on the show. The chemistry between Kit Young and Jack Wolfe is just amazing and every scene with them was just adorable and serotonin inducing.

The real shame is that the characters work so well together. They deserve their story properly told. Same goes for the King of Scars duology which also seems at risk here by keeping Alina in the story like they are doing.

The show has such an amazing cast. They shine together on screen as well as off screen and for them I still wish for a renewal or spin offs or whatever. They deserve it.

Looking at it just as a TV Show, it's definitely one of the better fantasy shows around and easily defies any teen drama clichés with it's rich world-building and well written characters. It's production value also increased.

As a book fan I'm disappointed. As a book fan I can't wrap my mind around the decisions made. As a book fan I want better things for these characters and I want the full amazing story written so masterfully by Leigh Bardugo told. The ending of this season unfortunately feels like some alternate take (the Grisha version of Marvel's What If so to speak) inferior to the original.

I do admit that as a TV watcher I'm intrigued with the possibility of this direction though.

I try to be fair here, I try so separate Books and Show, but it's very hard in that case. I think it's always easier to do so when you watched the adaptation before reading the source material.

As I said, I'm conflicted. I liked a lot about this season. I also disliked a lot. I think I really need some time to make up my mind.

This movie is too long.

There I said it, in the first sentence. It's not the only issue I have with it, but one of the most obvious ones. Whatever happened to well-structured 90 minutes movies? This one especially tries so hard to ride the wave of late 80s/90s family movies that the running time should've been a given. But nope, let's add a gazillion subplots that don't really matter.

The film is not without it's upsides though. David Harbour gives a great performance as ghost Ernest and his relationship with Kevin is believable and leads to a few touching moments during the film. Joy is a fun character. The score it great. It's also nice to see Niles Fitch again, though he's criminally underused as the jerkass older brother. Of course there's also Jennifer Coolidge as a fake medium and she slays as always.

I think the film just wants to be too many times all at once. A horror comedy, a family drama, but also a family comedy, an adventure, a little bit of a thriller, a mystery... you name it. While it is possible to cram in many genres at the same time, here it unfortunately doesn't work at all, which leads to tone shifts left and right as well as unresolved plot threads that make junks of the story look completely superfluous.

Anthony Mackie's Frank is a douchebag and I don't feel like the father and son conflict is really solved in the end. The mother is just in this movie, but doesn't really contribute. Tig Notaro's character is build up from the very beginning and then suddenly vanishes from the third act without a resolve. The "evil government" plot doesn't go anywhere. The last minute plot twist (which was pretty easy to guess tbh) has some weird implications (infertile woman goes crazy, makes husband commit murder, steals a child... eh what?) and overall the writing just doesn't have a coherent flow.

It's a movie that could've been so much more than it's, had it just committed to telling like ...one coherent story.

Welcome to the World of Reboots that don't understand what people love about the original, episode 238.

Seriously though, this is not a bad movie per se. It is fine as a fast paced animated adventure to entertain kids for a while, but it is not more than that. Now, I don't say it has to be, but animated movies have endless possibilities and this one came with a lot of potential that unfortunately didn't unfold. Or, you know, lazy writing.

At best this is a Hanna Barbera crossover movie (because everything needs to be a cinematic universe now) and at worst this is a film with an identity crisis that pretends to be one thing (a Scooby Doo film) but actually wants to be another (a superhero adventure).

Why they didn't just make an origin story about Blue Falcon Jr. and Dynomutt (Mark Wahlberg and Ken Jeong were excellent in the roles) is beyond me, because that's obviously what they wanted to do here, but I assume Scooby Doo just beat them out by sheer popularity.

The first 15 minutes or so are actually great. It starts as an origin story about how young Shaggy and puppy Scooby meet and befriend the rest of Mystery Inc and honestly if the movie just had been about that it would have been fine. Or well, just be a Scooby Doo mystery, like at all.

Twenty minutes in and the plot completely lost me. What started as a Scooby Doo film with potential turned into a supernatural superhero movie with ancient prophecies, spaceships (airships? I don't even care), robots and Hanna Barbera characters randomly thrown in. Honestly, the whole story about Scooby and his destiny felt so random, you could've replaced any character from the franchise with an original one, tweak some things and make this just an original action adventure film and I guarantee you no one had complained about it. Sure, it would've been a tad unoriginal and bland but fine for what it is, but using Scooby Doo and it's characters cheapens the whole thing because it is so obvious that the tie-in is just used a quick cash grab, it's embarrassing on WB's side.

Fred, Velma and Daphne are only in this film because they are required to be, they add literally nothing to the story and could've been easily cut out. Which is a shame. What makes Scooby Doo great is these characters together, something that only briefly occurs in the beginning and the end of the film. Shaggy gets more to do, because the plot says so but his conflict with Scooby is set up in the first five minutes of the film and comes and goes as expected and even a six year old can guess it's development and outcome. Shaggy and Scooby are also not their most likable versions here (except when they're children, because they're so adorable).

The shame is, I really enjoy the brief moments with Fred, Daphne and Velma. Fred is a glorious himbo (I still credit Freddie Prinze Jr for that take on Fred), Daphne is smart and resourceful and Velma not only the one to figure things out but also very good with technology in this version. I would've enjoyed these characters in another scenario, especially since their dynamic was also a lot of fun.

As said before, the Blue Falcon Team was also fun to watch. What didn't work was those two tossed together in a movie that has nothing to do with it's actually source material. If I want to watch a superhero movie, I watch a superhero movie. If I watch a Scooby Doo movie, I want a mystery and whacky shenanigans.

What's also a downside is a clearly wasted great voice cast. Zac Efron, Amanda Seyfried and Gina Rodriguez were great as more modern versions of Fred, Daphne and Velma. Mark Wahlberg, Jason Isaacs and especially Ken Jeong stole every scene they were in. I just wish they had gotten a better movie around those performances. What sticks out like a sore thumb however is Will Forte as Shaggy. I'm sorry, but why not let Matthew Lillard voice him like he has been for the last couple of years?

The humor is a lot hit or miss. Some of the pop culture references work really well and the physical comedy also has its moments. Some jokes however feel forced and are already pretty dated. I also can't wrap my mind around everything regarding Simon Cowell in this film. Like why?

The animation is decent enough, but sometimes very stale and feels unpolished. I don't know if this is another case of animators didn't get enough time to do it properly or it Warner Bros just didn't care, because style-wise it feels a lot like trying to ride the Illumination kool-aid but without the love for details and actual care.

This movie was a very frustrating experience. I can tell there could've been a good (maybe even great) Scooby Doo buried deep deep inside the finish product, but it just tries too hard to follow current trends and jump on the superhero movie wave to be stand on its own. Too bad, really. Unfortunately this makes it just one of many instead of its own unique individual film.

"Belle" is a tough movie to talk about, because I'm not entirely sure what to think about it. I'm torn right in the middle rather I liked it or not.

I usually love Hosoda's films. "Wolf Children" is an absolute masterpiece that not enough people talk about.

"Belle" however is in a way more miss than hit which is unfortunate because I do love the concept.

But positive things first, it is visually absolutely stunning. It's worth alone a watch for the gorgeous visuals which are definitely a reminder why I love animation and the possibilities it allows so much.

The music is also stunning. Not only the songs sung by Belle, but also the beautiful score. Kaho Nakamura has an incredible and unique voice. Her singing parts are brilliant, I do think however she lacks experience in the speaking ones. But nevertheless, visuals and music are the film's strong parts.

Writing ia were it falls flat or rather, becomes incredibly messy. That being said, it does start out relatively fine. The set up works, but everything that comes after it doesn't. The movie wants to do too much at the same time and kinda loses itself midway through.

The world-building does not always make sense. Basics of the virtual world of "U" are explained (it's not much different from other films or books using this topic) but there are simply some rules that don't really make sense, especially in connection to the real world.

Characters are introduced and stay either relatively flat or are build up to relevance only to not matter at all in the end (Peggy Sue comes to mind). Suzu's group of friends sadly never escapes the "Anime High Schoolers cliché" troup.

But those are all little issues that don't do much damage. For me it's the last half of the film that lost me.

The concept of Beauty and the Beast has been used countless times before, but I've never seen it done with the focus on abuse as it's primary function instead of the romance. I applaud the movie for being bold enough to do that.

It's how the abuse is dealt with in the end that I don't like. The moment Suzu finds out about the abused brothers every decision made in this film is puzzling to me and doesn't really connect to the set ups from before. Suzu and her friends basically broadcast a father abusing his children online and no one is going to do something? Not the authorities (only reasonable moment in the last half btw, calling the cops) or not anyone at all? Just a 17 year old girl? Yeah sorry, no. I can wrap my mind around an online community like "U" but not around that.

Second, and that's were the real issues start, Suzu goes to see the brothers and their abusive father all by herself. Her friends don't tag along, the adults around her just let her do it because "she wants to" and instead of it being incredibly stupid it's portrayed as something heroic. The only reason for this not to escalate is it that the plot suddenly demands the boys' father to stop attacking them and Suzu, because apparently her stare has some kind of magic powers a grown man gets scared of. And the resolution in the end is, the older brother has to face his dad instead of taking the beating. Also, Suzu's previous trauma, the one she got from her mother's death is apparently better now, because she found some understanding for her mother's choices. Honey, good for you that your worked through your experience, but your mother was a grown ass woman making the choice to save a drowning child, your a teenager who confronted an abusive man all by herself, put your own life and that of his son's in danger for nothing.

The movie lacks a kind of satisfying resolution and even if that is a decision made on purpose, it shouldn't be with the delicate subject matter.

Sorry, I ranted away a bit, because that movie truly frustrated me. It's so beautiful on one hand and so messy on the other.

A little bit of a backstory here: At university my focus was in studying literature and languages, but I had to take a seminar in Introduction to Film Studies. My professor was obsessed with this movie. Especially with it's technicality.

So, we had to watch it. Over and over again. Sometimes just the same scenes about ten times just to analyze camera angles and position of the actors.

And yes, the camera work and really whole direction of the movie is excellently done, but if you have to watch it several times just for this, it becomes a drag.

What I mean by that is, I never disliked the movie, but I also never got the opportunity to appreciate it for what it is. T

That being said, I like to analyze movies, but I'm more interested in the writing than the camera angles (not saying it's not interesting, just not my main focus), after not having watched it for a couple of year I got the chance to experience this film with a slightly different approach and found a new appreciation for it.

It's just a really good and interesting film that deals with a very difficult topic but in such a unique and fascinating way.

It is one of the classics of it's time I'd definitely recommend.

I started watching this show when it initially came out and then simply forgot to catch up about half way through. That says probably much about it as a whole.

It is not that the show is bad. It isn't. However, it's not really good either. It borders in a strange territory of "it's fine." Also, pointless.

At this point we can probably all agree that Ewan McGregor as Obi-Wan is probably the best thing to come out of the prequels and it is great to watch him play that role again. It's also nice to see Hayden Christensen return and this time without monologues about sand. He does most of the physical heavy lifting as Vader, while James Earl Jones provides the iconic voice, sans a few exceptions and flashbacks. It's well done and if the press tours indicates one thing, than that Christensen deserved a much loved return. The chemistry between him and McGregor is also still excellent and feels like they never stopped playing these parts side by side. The moments between Obi-Wan and Vader also provide most of the emotional and interesting parts about the story.

Unfortunately they also bring most of the baggage and issues. Well, granted the biggest issues come from this being a prequel as well and one that has no true justification to exist apart from nostalgia and Disney loving the Star Wars money. The problem is that no matter how hard Obi-Wan and Anakin clash, we know where this ends. Their characters are also pretty stagnant. There's no need to develop them or give them much of an arc (they try with Obi-Wan but it's really half-baked) because in the end of the day, one stays on Tattooine and the other run continues to terrorize the galaxy. There are also a lot of dumb decisions made by characters to keep within the original trilogy's continuation. On the bright side, Uncle Owen gets a personality in this one.

Another issue comes in the shape of Star Wars Rebels of all things. I make it no secret that I prefer Star Wars animated contend of the recent years to live action continuations and in this particular case it hurt the Obi-Wan show that they tried to recreate certain scenes Rebels already did between Vader and Ahsoka a couple of years ago and due to being better paced, they did it better.

Vivien Lyra Blair shines as young Leia and really nails her as a believable counterpart to Carrie Fisher's iconic performance. Her relationship with Obi-Wan is probably the most endearing aspect of the whole show. I even overlook the fact that this is basically a six episode justification to why Leia would name her son Ben (it also makes Rise of Skywalker even more terrible in retrospective, just when I thought that wasn't possible.)

I also like the bait-and-switch that the show actually showed the relationship between Obi-Wan and Leia instead of focusing on him protecting Luke from the shadows.

The show also introduced some new characters and most of the were just forgettable and barely felt important. I enjoyed Kumail Nanjiani's charming con man though and hope they use him for future projects.

Rupert Friend didn't do it for me as the Grand Inquisitor. Jason Isaacs performance in Rebels (again) was way more menacing.

Then there is Reva. First of all, parts of this fandom are so gross for how they treated Moses Ingram, the actress that portrays her. It was disgusting and she didn't deserve this. We already saw how nasty this fandom gets with Kelly Marie Tran and they were at it again.

That being said, and that makes it weird to admit to that, I could not stand this character. I like the idea of Reva, but I thought the writing for her character was terrible and didn't gave the actress much to do but being irritating and shouty. It's unfortunate, because I think she could have been a good character, had the writing supported it. She almost felt like an annoying afterthought because they suddenly realized the show needs an antagonist besides Vader.

Like I said, I have complicated feelings here. I enjoyed parts of it a lot. Most of it however felt like an oddly paced fan service event that just didn't need to exist. The Star Wars universe is huge and I wish they would finally dare to explore completely new aspects of it, free of boundaries to other films or shows.

Rachel McAdams gotta be the weirdest example of type casting I've ever seen. I mean, girlfriend of a time traveler is very specific, you gotta admit that.

"About Time" is overall a really beautiful film, with stellar performances by Domhnall Gleeson and Bill Nighy.

It is as much a love story as it is a tender tale about fatherly love. While protagonist Tim's father does everything possible to spend more time with his children, Tim needs to sacrifice this precious time for the sake of his children as well. It is beautiful and bittersweet and carries a profound message all around.

While the mechanics of time travel are a bit, let's say "timey-wimey" here, unlike other stories that use it as a plot device, here the core of the story is about love and family and using the time you have the best you can.

While Tim initially uses his unique abilities to correct mistakes - and honestly, who wouldn't, he slowly learns to understand that this might not be the way to go through life.

Let's be real, if we could jump back to moments in our lives that we regret, that embarrassed or hurt us, we would all seek that opportunity. Even more so, nobody would pass on the chance to spend more time with a beloved person they've lost, but overall those moments are part of our lives.

So, the message if this film is that even with the ability to redo things in your life, you can never truly go back, because in the end you end up so stuck in your own past that the future might passes you by.

It is a tough lesson for Tim to learn, but also for the audience. But beside those bittersweet moments, the movie is mostly positive and uplifting. The chemistry between the cast is undeniable and despite some questionable and even manipulative tendencies in the beginning (maybe the only aspect I didn't enjoy as much), Tim and Mary make for a lovely couple.

It is definitely a different kind of time travel movie and worth a watch.

I get the slight feeling that from all the TV Show sequels that are happening decades after the original, Cobra Kai is the only one who actually knows what it's doing regarding a set up for new characters and use legacy ones in a clever and plot relevant way.

That 90's Show feels like a Disney Show, only that people are allowed to swear and everyone is occasionally stoned. It is like a weird mash up of Girl Meets World and Fuller House that desperately tries to grasps the straws that gave That 70's Show it's cult status.

I'm not saying the show is completely bad. It surely has its moments, but with only ten episodes on its current resume, those moments are just too rare.

When old cast is on screen together they still work their magic. Red is still Red. Kitty is still Kitty. Eric and Donna feel like a natural grown up version of where we've last seen them and so do Jackie and Kelso, despite some retcons. Fez has always been controversial to say the least and it's better the show decided not to mention the absence of Hyde at all and just roll with it.

So yeah, the old gang (and some of the cameos) are a delight. They are the show's biggest saving grace and at the same time it's biggest issue. Because we are not supposed to be in for just them.

Fuller House, for all it's faults decided to focus more on its old cast members from the get go and interwined it with the new ones, while Girl Meets World wanted to shift focus to the new characters. That 90s Show takes more of a Girl Meets World approach with similar (lack of) success.

The new characters function as carbon copies of the old one and make every episode as predictable as it gets. There's simply not enough substance here to make them work outside of the nostalgia basement (pun füllt intended). And look, I don't completely blame the young cast for this. It's always a potpourri of acting, writing and directing that makes something work or fail. The writing of this show is just not good. It's awkward at best and cringeworthy at worst. The older cast members just make it works, because they're long enough in this business to make the best out of it. The younger ones just lack the experience.

Leia does feel like she could be the daughter of Eric and Donna, so I give them probs for that. She also feels like the most cookie cutter Disney Channel character. Eric was never the most interesting or funniest of the original gang, but he worked within his ensemble, Leia doesn't but we'll get to the chemistry or more lack of in a minute. Jay also feels like he could be Kelso's son and the casting department did a small miracle here, because he looks and acts like a young Ashton Kutcher. I also like that he got at least some of Jackie's braincells. Gwen I personally found most annoying and I don't know if it's the writing or the forced line delivery, but her character just didn't work for me. Ozzy is fine and at least less offensive than Fez used to be. Nate is basically existing and, apart from his lack of lady's man attitude, feels more like Kelso than the actual Kelso of the show. Nikki is probably the best acted out of the teenagers, but is given little to so for most of the season.

I don't say the characters have no room for improvement should this be picked up for a second season, but the writers must actually allow them to grow into their own instead of being remembrances of the past.

The biggest issue wasn't the characterisation however the lack of chemistry between them. While I did buy the bromance between Jay and Nate, everything else just didn't work for me. It made sense for Leia to be the odd one out because she was literally the new girl, but the rest of the group never felt like friends. Gwen and Nate never believably sold a bond as siblings, Nikki and Nate never even touched the chemistry of Kelso and Jackie (or Donna and Eric) and the only reason why Gwen seemed to hang out with either Nikki or Jay is er brother's relationship with them. Which leads to Ozzy who is apparently mostly Gwen's friend and just tags along. Developing relationships with Leia and the gang also felt forced. She and Gwen are best friends in the end because the script says so. She and Jay have a romantic relationship because the script says so. That awkward moment of romantic tension between Leia and Nate made no sense and again, happened because the script says so. She has no real relationship with Nikki. I dare say the only one of her friendships that kind of worked was with Ozzy.

Another issue the show has is with it's portrayal of the 90s as a whole. My Dad grew up in the late 60s/70s and we used to watch the original show together a lot and he always praised it for it's accurate portrayal of the 70s. Me, a 90s kid, can't say the same about the sequel. It feels like the 90s through a 2023 lense (and no, I don't mean an openly gay Asian kid in Wisconsin, that part is fine), appealing to how Gen Z thinks the 90s used to be. Dear Reader, they weren't like that. It looks and sounds like the 90s after a quick Wikipedia research on the decade instead of a deep dive and takes away all the authenticity from the show. Which brings me to the question, who is the supposed target audience here? A new generation of viewers? Old fans? Both of them? Because I don't think it works for anyone in particular.

Like I said, it's not necessarily a bad show. It plays it way too cookie cutter and safe, avoiding most of the edges it's predecessor had. At least we can probably be thankful the show didn't ruin any of the original characters and that the worst offense is the jumbled timeline and that Leia's and Jay's ages make no sense (so, where's Betsy?), but that's it.

Should this show get a second season, it needs to step up it's game and find its own identity soon.

Watching The Truman Show from a 2023 lense is truly a fascinating experience. I haven't watched this movie in many years, even though it is probably still up there with the best ones I've ever experienced. It is simply not an easy watch, because no matter how many times, it still makes my brain work overtime. I do mean that positively though.

We live in a world of multimedia consume that is ever growing through the internet, live streams and new resources to add to the online live experience. While we're not watched in the same way unassuming Truman is, you do get an eerie feeling that privacy is very often just an illusion these days. I mean, you just talk about wanting a new blue jeans and then you put out your phone and guess what adds you mostly get now? Again, not the same but still in the same realm of uncomfortableness.

I don't think I need to recap this movie, because even if you haven't watched this (why would you read a review like than anyway then?) you'll know the basics.

The concept is easy and yet so complex. Man trapped in an enteral TV show everybody but him is aware off.

We live in the age of reality TV and more. There are countless shows of celebrities and "regular" people that have no issue being filmed for TV shows or even live stream themselves. The enjoy sharing every private detail of their lives and while that is questionable, it is at least consensual. Not so much when it comes to their young children, but that opens a whole different can or worms. Maybe when should actually compare it more to paparazzi culture and how many people in the public eye can't take as much as a walk down the street without being photographed and put online. But again, they are at least aware of it l.

Truman, not so much. He believes the lie until he gets too many questionable clues that make him rethink his entire life and situation and he starts to investigate the truth.

One of the biggest questions the movie offers is if Truman is happy in his world until he starts to question it. Is his life in the TV bubble worse than a possible life in the outsight world can offer him? Ed Harris's defacto villain Christof even asks him that important question. In a way, even if morally wrong, he is probably right that Truman would be better off in his safe haven of a Utopia than experiencing a world he has never known but nevertheless he makes the brave choice in the end.

The other dilemma the movie is, is one of moral complexity. As Natasha McElhone's Sylvia points out, it is rather discussing to adopt a baby only to put him on display since birth without ever giving him the truth or choice to walk away from it. I called Christof a "defacto villain" before because that is clearly his function. He is the one responsible for the Truman Show and even if he might has moments where he questions his actions, he desperately wants to keep Truman. A false form of fatherly love for him (he did watch him grow up)? Maybe. An incredible form of delusion and narcissism? Most definitely. His last conversation with Truman, where his voice booms out directly off the sky like he is God is even an indication that people should never play God to begin with.

Religious imagery aside, it's also just so wrong on a moral level and the movie beautifully toys with how twisted Truman's whole world is. He has parents, friends, neighbors, a wife even... all actors who willingly play along for the paycheck. While it is set to believe that the people closest to him do care, it doesn't change the fact that no one speaks up about his situation. Same goes for the audience. The same people who cheer for him to get out in the end are those who watch his show every day without much or a problem, because it is light entertainment for them. And don't we all fall for a certain kind of entertainment ourselves every day. Is something like a real life Truman Show not actually something that could happen if we're not careful?

But enough of that. Let's talk about Jim Carrey for a moment. He's mostly a comedic actor and very good at it, even though he's sometimes a bit of "special taste." It is sadly barely acknowledged what a great dramatic actor he can be when given the chance.

The Truman show remains one of his performances today.

I love this movie. I think it's fantastic and still holds up many years later with more of a relevance that ever before.

It's quite an interesting version of Emma, isn't it? It definitely feels modernized, despite not changing the actual time the story is set in. Or let me put it like this, it feels more modern than the 2005 version of Pride and Prejudice but thankfully not as modernized as other recent adaptations of classics.

I recently reread the book, so I'm very much into Emma mode right now. Behold though, my first ever introduction to the story and characters wasn't the novel, but rather the 1996 version starring Gwyneth Paltrow, so that will always be special to me.

Nevertheless, I really enjoyed that version. While some aspects of the story were cut short (it is a long book after all) I think they got the most important beats and delivered well on them.

The film looks gorgeous. It has such a nice aesthetic and direction Autumn de Wilde really had a vision here. I wasn't always keen on the costumes (poor Johnny Flynn in that ridiculous collar) but overall it was just beautiful to look at.

The choices of music were odd to say the least. There was quite too much, well, comedic soundtrack or sound effects in the background. It gave the movie and unintentional (was it unintentional?) tone of a 1940s screwball comedy which didn't fit with the rest of it.

The casting was mostly great. Anya Taylor-Joy is a fantastic Emma and casting Bill Nighy as Mr. Woodhouse was also a great idea. Josh O'Conner makes for a very slimy Mr. Elton (who is worse, Mr. Elton or Mr. Collins? Discuss!) and Callum Turner was equally charming as well as slightly irritating as Mr. Churchill, as he should be. Miranda Hart as Miss Bates was a genius move, because she managed to make one of the most annoying characters feel earnest and even sympathetic. Rupert Graves (we all know his name is Greg, please get that reference) and Gemma Whelan perfectly rounded up the cast as the Westons.

I had my issues with Mia Goth as Harriet though. An unpopular opinion, as it seems. I admit that Harriet is far from my favorite character and I don't really like her in any adaptation or the book, but Goth made her a bit too ditzy for my liking.

Then there's Johnny Flynn, who I wasn't sure of in the beginning. Maybe it just took me a minute to get used to a blonde Mr. Knightley or the fact that, despite being the right age, looking younger for me to fully believe him in the character, but he won me over with endless charm. It also helped to accept this version as a completely new interpretation of the character. Less stoic, more passionate and emotional. It's not quite Book Knightley, but it works here.

Taylor-Joy and Flynn have excellent chemistry, especially in the last half of the movie and I understand why people call it the "steamiest" or even "horniest" version of Emma, because there's electricity between them. Or, you can cut the sexual tension with a butter knife.

I don't know how this one ranks among other Emma adaptations for me at the moment, but I will say this much, it's worth it. It's fun, entertaining, keeps the spirit of the book and adds some new angles.

I have not watched Arrival since the year it came out (and even then I was late to the party). This rewatch definitely made me appreciate it more than the first time around.

I think my problem from the get go has always been that I thought the movie was massively overhped and I still do. I also get why people love it.

The movie does know how to deliver on its atmosphere and sets a very unique tone. It's something between melancholy, dread and even a sense of uncomfortable unsettlement. Different from any other science fiction film I've watched.

I also like the concept of the movie. Instead of your typical alien Invasion with a lot of explosions it's all about the communication, the use of language and the importance of it. That aspect is brilliant.

The lead performance by Amy Adams is also again fantastic. She gives a beautiful performance and deserved all the recognition for it and more. Or as we should call it: Another performance Amy Adams should've gotten the Oscar for and somehow didn't.

Also great in this despite not having much to do, Jeremy Renner.

The aliens also have a unique and interesting design and their form of communication is imaginative and new.

Then the plot twist happens and the film kinda loses me.

Before you think I'm nuts, hear me out on this one. I understand the film. I understand the twist. I like the general thought of this personal and also moral dilemma Louise is going through by knowing the future and still letting it play out. It certainly makes for an interesting discussion and keeps you thinking about it long after you finished the film. I appreciate all that. I also think this is one of the better uses of non-linear storytelling.

I just...found myself honestly not caring much about it all. Again, I like the thought provoking element of it, not the whole time travel hijinks and the "let's stop the Chinese from blowing up our new alien buddies" aspect, that's when the film suddenly borders into cliché territory.

The pacing is also a big issue for me. It starts out intriguing, slows down too much in the middle part and then turns into a messy third act. The middle part is especially frustrating because a lot of the linguistic centric parts of the story are told via montage and voice over. How was that thing with the show not tell?

Despite great performances I also think for such a "prestige" film the characters fall pretty flat. Especially the whole military cast surrounding Forrest Whitaker (who I can't take seriously no matter what he's doing) who are all pretty run-in-the-mill been there done that characters.

"Arrival" is an interesting film that certainly deserves it's fan base. For me it's trying a little bit too hard to be meaningful and important but "not for me" definitely doesn't equal "not good."

I am torn when it comes to this show. It is definitely better than your run-in-the-mill supernatural teen drama, but as an adaptation of Sally Green's novel (or rather series) "Half-Bad" it just doesn't work for me.

I didn't even know this show released, which is to blame on a) Netflix's lack or promotion (was there a trailer? Anything?) and b) the ridiculous change of the name. Hadn't I accidentally read the synopsis I still would be very clueless about this show.

Like I said, it's not your average teen drama, but it did it's best to add more stereotypical aspects that are thankfully absent from the book. Say, emphasizing the love triangle (though I admit tilt could've been worse).

Basic story beats still exist, but weirdly enough a lot of happenings are either missing completely, softened or in other parts turned up to 11. It makes not much sense.

The world-building is fine, though I am glad I knew beforehand how that special system of witchcraft works to get the full picture.

The show has a nice aesthetic that is very gloomy and melancholic but never feels too much.

I don't get certain changes to the characters to be honest. Annalise is much more prominent and less of a tool than she is in the book which is a welcome change, but her new powers are literally a deus ex machina overkill. Evil Uncle Soul is now Evil Daddy Soul with a different edge of superiority complex, but also less interesting. They managed to make Jessica is even worse on the show and one of the most hateable characters I've ever had the displeasure to watch (props to the actress). Unfortunately they also decided to cut out Nathan's more likeable siblings, Debby and Arran. Celia is softer and her relationship with Nathan becomes much more loving and supportive, which is something I enjoyed, but also takes away from the duality of her character and the fine line between good and evil. Nathan is kinda a wet blanket here. He's sweet and it's easy to feel for him and the actor is doing a great job, but gone is the sassy l emo boy from the novels. Gabriel is, like in the books, the most shining light among the characters. He's not the sweet cinnamon roll with some edge from the books, but an insanely charming rogueish flirt but somehow it works. His backstory and powers are also changed for...reasons I suppose. This leaves Mercury (where's Rose, y'all?) who is very boring and obviously just a set up as the next villain for the second season that will never come now.

The relationships or rather the main love triangle are okay-ish. Since Annalise got a bit of a character upgrade her relationship with Nathan feels more natural and is less annoying, but the real chemistry still lies between Nathan and Gabriel, who are great together. The end suggested some kind of triangle or maybe just poly-armorous relationship between all three of them (either Annalise was clueless about Nathan's and Gabriel's feelings, she just didn't give a shit or wanted to join in, who knows?).

I'm not surprised this didn't get a renewal. Netflix didn't do anything to get viewers in and the axe shows if they don't bring in the big viewership like a week after initial release (which is stupid, but a different topic.). The other issue is, book fans will most likely feel alienated by the many changes, especially since most of them are not needed changes to translate material better from page to screen, they're just there...because.

I'm not particularly sad about this cancelation though there was an untapped potential for future seasons that probably deserved at least one more chance to be explored.

I am torn when it comes to this show. It is definitely better than your run-in-the-mill supernatural teen drama, but as an adaptation of Sally Green's novel (or rather series) "Half-Bad" it just doesn't work for me.

I didn't even know this show released, which is to blame on a) Netflix's lack or promotion (was there a trailer? Anything?) and b) the ridiculous change of the name. Hadn't I accidentally read the synopsis I still would be very clueless about this show.

Like I said, it's not your average teen drama, but it did it's best to add more stereotypical aspects that are thankfully absent from the book. Say, emphasizing the love triangle (though I admit tilt could've been worse).

Basic story beats still exist, but weirdly enough a lot of happenings are either missing completely, softened or in other parts turned up to 11. It makes not much sense.

The world-building is fine, though I am glad I knew beforehand how that special system of witchcraft works to get the full picture.

The show has a nice aesthetic that is very gloomy and melancholic but never feels too much.

I don't get certain changes to the characters to be honest. Annalise is much more prominent and less of a tool than she is in the book which is a welcome change, but her new powers are literally a deus ex machina overkill. Evil Uncle Soul is now Evil Daddy Soul with a different edge of superiority complex, but also less interesting. They managed to make Jessica is even worse on the show and one of the most hateable characters I've ever had the displeasure to watch (props to the actress). Unfortunately they also decided to cut out Nathan's more likeable siblings, Debby and Arran. Celia is softer and her relationship with Nathan becomes much more loving and supportive, which is something I enjoyed, but also takes away from the duality of her character and the fine line between good and evil. Nathan is kinda a wet blanket here. He's sweet and it's easy to feel for him and the actor is doing a great job, but gone is the sassy l emo boy from the novels. Gabriel is, like in the books, the most shining light among the characters. He's not the sweet cinnamon roll with some edge from the books, but an insanely charming rogueish flirt but somehow it works. His backstory and powers are also changed for...reasons I suppose. This leaves Mercury (where's Rose, y'all?) who is very boring and obviously just a set up as the next villain for the second season that will never come now.

The relationships or rather the main love triangle are okay-ish. Since Annalise got a bit of a character upgrade her relationship with Nathan feels more natural and is less annoying, but the real chemistry still lies between Nathan and Gabriel, who are great together. The end suggested some kind of triangle or maybe just poly-armorous relationship between all three of them (either Annalise was clueless about Nathan's and Gabriel's feelings, she just didn't give a shit or wanted to join in, who knows?).

I'm not surprised this didn't get a renewal. Netflix didn't do anything to get viewers in and the axe shows if they don't bring in the big viewership like a week after initial release (which is stupid, but a different topic.). The other issue is, book fans will most likely feel alienated by the many changes, especially since most of them are not needed changes to translate material better from page to screen, they're just there...because.

I'm not particularly sad about this cancelation though there was an untapped potential for future seasons that probably deserved at least one more chance to be explored.

This is me bordering into "unpopular opinion" territory again.

I don't know what it is with movies this year. Most of those I really looked forward to ended up being a disappointed. I enjoyed the book and I grew up loving the 90's adaptation and I really wanted to love this one, the trailer looked great and I generally love musicals, so I don't know exactly what it is here, that did not sit well with me. Maybe it was the bizarre singing babies opening scene already (creepy af).

I never really got around to listen to the musical soundtrack or even watch it, so I went into this adaptation without much knowledge (only song I knew beforehand was 'Revolting Children') and while the music was mostly fine, I found the songs painfully forgettable.

The actors were okay, I guess. Matilda's parents were funny, but didn't get enough screentime. Lashana Lynch was lovely as Miss Honey (what a voice!) though I found her a bit too meek for most of the film's run. I usually love Emma Thompson, but she didn't really do it for me as the Trunchbull. Pam Farris was fierce and scary, yet oddly funny and entertaining while Thompson nailed the mean-spirited nature, but failed to evolve above that. Her portrayal felt oddly safe. Young Alisha Weir certainly has screen presence and will go her way (and I don't want to be too critical of child actors, it's more the direction and writing I'm blaming here) but Matilda often felt too serious or even too bratty compared to her book counterpart or the relatable portrayal by Mara Wilson, who made her extraordinarily endearing.

I know I shouldn't compare adaptations too much, but I just can't help it. This one was clearly a high value production spectacle but it lacked the heart and soul of the 90s film. The tone was all over the place, it was too long and oddly boring at times.

It had it's moments but overall it lacked the certain something.

And really, wtf was that added subplot about Matilda's story that turned out to be about Miss Honey's parents? That was just bizarre and unnecessary.

I needed to let that movie sink in. I went into it only knowing a very basic premise and that Mila Kunis is apparently giving a career best performance.

The movie tackles not one, but two extremely diffcult topics. It deals with rape and a school shooting. So, if those topics are triggering to to you, do not watch it. Do not continue with this review.

Kunis does in fact give a great performance as a woman traumatized by her past who has never really confronted her trauma and tried to push it away. Her character, Ani, is a writer for a women's magazine (writing about sex and man's pleasure nonetheless), engaged to rich and successful Luke (a great Finn Wittrock) and seemingly has build a great life for herself.

What is known to public is that she is the survivor of a school shooting and that fellow survivor Dean (Alex Barone) accuses her of being an accomplice rather than a victim. What nobody knows, because the story got twisted through the years is, that Ani was raped by Dean and his friends, Ani's High School boyfriend Liam (Isaac Kragten) among them, when she was a teenager.

Kunis does indeed a great job here. It's a break from her usual comfortable (even though great) comedic performances and she is allowed to show off some acting chops here. Ani is abrasive and hollow and created a personality that pleases people around her. She is a chameleon that can adapt to any situation to seem as "fine" as possible. She is not always a likeable character and she doesn't have to be. Would I call it a career best performance, I don't know. Most the heavy lifting is done by Cruel Summer's Chiara Aurelia who portrays a younger Ani, or Tiffany as she was known back then. Aurelia already showed in Cruel Summer that she is a great young actress and shines here as well, portraying a confused and scared girl, overwhelmed with a terrible situation and not able to deal with her trauma.

When a documentary film maker approaches Ani about an interview showcasing her point of view on the shooting, a downward spiral starts that pushes Ani to confront feelings she has buried a long time ago. Haunting flashbacks cue the viewer in on what really happened.

I admit, at first I was sure the movie would provide a twist ending. It toyed very early on (and very on the nose) with the concept of an unreliable narrator and I was almost certain that the movie would reveal Ani as an accomplice in the last couple of minutes (which would explain the sometimes grading voice over which could get slightly annoying). Half way through I was hoping to be wrong, because Ani being involved in planing a shooting wouldn't have done real survivors any good and would've felt exploitative and tasteless. Thankfully I was wrong and the twist never came. The movie works simply as an encouragement to speak up, that your trauma is valid and that no one can tell you how to feel about it. And that a lot of peope are simply trash and don't deserve to be protected, even if they went through terrible experiences as well.

The movie constantly walks a fine and sensitive line and tries to deal with both topics in a respectful way. Ani chooses to be called a victim instead of a survivor, because she had been denied to be one for so many years.

It also doesn't shy away from making sure the audience knows that the shooters have initially been victims of excessive bullying, but it doesn't excuse their behavior and choices with it. Instead of excusing what they did or blaming it on mental health (something the media loves to do) it shows it as a clear act of inexcusable revenge porn that's not justified, no matter through how much pain they went. Ani's choice not to engage in the horrible act, despite being traumatized and hurt by her fellow students actions and living on to turn her pain into something that can actively help other victims, is the direct flip side to it.

It's not an easy movie to watch and sometimes stays too much on the surface when it could have landed a deep dive, but for the complexity and sensitivity of the subject matter it does a fine job.

What a messy trainwreck. And I'm saying that as someone who didn't get all the bad ratings and reviews in the beginning.

The premise is quite interesting. Girl grows up in a cult, escapes after suffering severe abuse, psychologist with a traumatic past takes care of her and makes her part of her own family which causes tension and danger because the cult is not done with the girl yet.

First off, for a show about a supposed evil Satanic cult, the "main antagonists" are almost a non-presence and only steer up real trouble in the finale. Sure, they have looming presence and appear in some flashbacks but overall it's so over the top and ridiculous that they never get as menacing as they're supposed to be.

The story is partially paced well and then suddenly incredibly slow. Nothing interesting happens, is what I am trying to say. Instead of focusing on Mae's background, her trauma and the cult lurking in the background, most of the show focuses on teenage drama and plotlines involving the main family that never actually goes anywhere or feels pretty redunant because the characters are so paper thin that it's almost impossible to be invested in them.

Suzanne, played by Emily Deschanel, is a terrible character. She is bad at her job and an awful mother to her daughters. I get she has suffered through sever trauma herself and never dealt with some underlying aspects of it, but damn how wasn't that woman fired. How is her husband still talking to her? The writing for her character is off and badly researched, it feels like a Google Search for "things a psychologist might say" and that's most of her dialogue. She also negelects her family and actively puts them in danger for a girl she just met (trauma projection as an explanation does not explain all of her irratic behavior). She is also highly unprofessional (even taking in one of her patients is illogical), terrible at reading situations and emotionally easily to manipulate. The finale was really the icing on the top. Who leaves their family like that and then expects some understanding for it? Also, I've never watched all of Bones, but I know Emily D. is a better actor than this show broadcasts. There were acting choices downright irritating here.

Suzanne's husband Peter is not the best of characters either, but at least he is a more decent parent than her. He unfortunately gets stuck in the cliched role of "husband who makes less money than his successful wife and can't be an adult about it," for half of the season, but thankfully that changes towards the end.

Helen, the eldest daughter, is a pointless character. She first is portrayed as some kind of popular mean girl who treats her younger sister awfully at school and then is thrown in some half-baked coming out story. She literally serves no purpose within the story and could've been written out completely without any change to the overall plot.

Middle child Jules is actually the only one of the sisters that serves a narrative purpose. She is a socially awkward loner, with only one close friend, a crush on a rather popular boy and gets unfortunately chosen by her mother to take Mae under her wing. Jules can act slightly irritating as well, though she is a teenager and her behavior is at least understandable. Why I don't agree with calling a trauma survivor who has no idea how socialzing works a "narcissist" I did feel sympathy for Jules and her feelings of neglect and being replaced. She didn't always react in the right way, but at least she was sympathetic in her reasons.

Dani, the youngest daughter, is one of the two most likeable characters on the show. Narratively she also barely serves aby purpose but she is adorable and loves Musicals, so she basically gets a pass for everything.

The other truly likeable character is Alex, the lead detective on Mae's case. He is a genuinely good guy who is also competent in his job and actually moves the narrative forward. I'm also not sure if he was flirting with the younger officer (whose name I never caught) who assisted him or if it was supposed to be a mentor/mentee relationship but who cares, they were kinda cute.

There were also some side characters like Isaac, Jules' best friend who was irrationally jealous of Mae because she spend like a couple of days with her. There's Helen's boyfriend Teddy, who has no personality and exists for some dumb last minute plot twist. There's this evil Sheriff who never feels as threatening as he is intended to be. Noah, Mae's older brother also shows up briefly trying to get close to Jules, but he's also so inconsequential nothing would be missing without him in the story.

Which brings me to Mae herself and my question, what the fuck did the writers even intend with her character. One minute she was supposed to be a sympathetic and misunderstood victim, who just didn't understand social norms and trying her best to fit within the family and the next minute some weird jump scare music started playing (the music in this show was awful) and she was portrayed as a psychotic and creepy horror movie villain. Like what was the intention here? Making her sympathetic made sense, but the villainizing of an abuse victim rang all the wrong bells. Especially since the finale confirmed that apparently the more sinister approach towards Mae was the more intended one (even if it happened because she grew up in that cult, she was shown with a basic knowledge and emotional understanding of right and wrong as well as common morals). So she was a manipulate narcissist after all? What kind of message does that send?

Honestly, I think the show had potential but the bad writing just completely screwed that one up. I just keep wondering if the book is just as irritating.

Well, that was a weird one.

I'm probably bordering into unpopular opinion territory here, but I did not enjoy this episode much. And no, that doesn't mean "I don't get it."

I just personally feel like it is a matter of style over substance with this one.

The story is about a deaf knight whose whole battalion falls victim to a Sirene, leaving him the only survivor because he couldn't hear her voice. The Sirene is intrigued by this and stalks him through the woods only to be seemingly killed by him for her treasure. The knight apparently regains his hearing only to be killed by the "not-so-dead Sirene. It is a cautionary tale of greed and unlucky circumstances in it's core and wants to be so much more than that.

The visuals are what set this episode apart. It's a style the show has not yet explored and while not my personal taste (I found the movements to be way too frantic to be enjoyable) I can appreciate it has an immense accomplishment. I guess I might just not be "artsy" enough to fully immerse myself with this one.

It is also a tonal shift from the rest of the show. I do think being experimental is something the show should afford being more often, but experiments can go wrong and this particular one feels like it just belongs somewhere else.